Artificial Intelligence and Bank Soundness: Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea - Part 2

Banks have experienced chronic weaknesses as well as frequent crisis over the years. As bank failures are costly and affect global economies, banks are constantly under intense scrutiny by regulators. This makes banks the most highly regulated industry in the world today. As banks grow into the 21st century framework, banks are in need to embrace Artificial Intelligence (AI) to not only to provide personalized world class service to its large database of customers but most importantly to survive. The chapter provides a taxonomy of bank soundness in the face of AI through the lens of CAMELS where C (Capital), A(Asset), M(Management), E(Earnings), L(Liquidity), S(Sensitivity). The taxonomy partitions challenges from the main strand of CAMELS into distinct categories of AI into 1(C), 4(A), 17(M), 8 (E), 1(L), 2(S) categories that banks and regulatory teams need to consider in evaluating AI use in banks. Although AI offers numerous opportunities to enable banks to operate more efficiently and effectively, at the same time banks also need to give assurance that AI ‘do no harm’ to stakeholders. Posing many unresolved questions, it seems that banks are trapped between the devil and the deep blue sea for now

Artificial Intelligence and Bank Soundness: A Done Deal? - Part 1

Banks soundness plays a crucial role in determining economic prosperity. As such, banks are under intense scrutiny to make wise decisions that enhances bank stability. Artificial Intelligence (AI) plays a significant role in changing the way banks operate and service their customers. Banks are becoming more modern and relevant in people’s life as a result. The most significant contribution of AI is it provides a lifeline for bank’s survival. The chapter provides a taxonomy of bank soundness in the face of AI through the lens of CAMELS where C (Capital), A(Asset), M(Management), E(Earnings), L(Liquidity), S(Sensitivity). The taxonomy partitions opportunities from the main strand of CAMELS into distinct categories of 1 (C), 6(A), 17(M), 16 (E), 3(L), 6(S). It is highly evident that banks will soon extinct if they do not embed AI into their operations. As such, AI is a done deal for banks. Yet will AI contribute to bank soundness remains to be seen

Making sense of the information systems use field

Information Systems (IS) Use has been discussed for more than three decades. During this time various perspectives of IS Use are found in the literature, which leads to a complex picture. Thus the main research question is “How to make sense of the IS Use field?” To begin to address this question I discuss the diversity and development of IS Use discourses as contributing to this complexity. The standard ways of understanding diversity and development of perspectives or discourses as paradigms (Burrell and Morgan, etc.) are found to be insufficient. A deeper understanding of what paradigm means is required. Yet, discussion of what paradigms are in philosophy of science (Kuhn, etc.) is controversial and is unable to address both diversity and development in the IS Use field. This thesis argues that Dooyeweerd’s philosophy can provide fruitful understanding of these. This is given an indicative test by investigating ‘what is important’ to the authors of seminal papers who stimulated the main IS Use discourses. A desk study approach was used to aspectually analyse the relevant texts in these papers. The findings are that I) Dooyeweerd's philosophy can provide new insight into the nature of paradigms. II) Dooyeweerd's aspects can provide a rich understanding of the diversity and development of Information Systems Use paradigms. These give one way of making sense of IS Use field that overcomes problems of existing approaches.This way making sense of the IS Use field can contribute: I) To theory, first in IS, by bringing integration to the field of IS Use and stimulating new avenues of research, Second to philosophy of science, by Dooyeweerdian insight into the nature of paradigms; II) To methodology in IS by using Dooyeweerd’s aspects as a tool to investigate what is implicitly held as important to the authors; III) To Dooyeweerd research community by showing the application of it in addressing the diversity and development of IS Use perspectives. Limitations of the research and possible further research are discussed in the conclusion

Dooyeweerd’s understanding of meaning (2) : some implications

Meaning is important in everyday life, and each science focuses on certain ways in which reality is meaningful. This article (the second of two) discusses practical implications of Herman Dooyeweerd’s understanding of meaning for everyday experience, scientific theories, scientific methodology, and philosophical underpinning. It uses eight themes related to meaning in Dooyeweerd’s philosophy, which are discussed philosophically in the first article (and summarised here). This article ends with a case study in which the themes are applied together to understanding Thomas Kuhn’s notion of paradigms